PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PMFB vs. TMAR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PMFB vs. TMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February (PMFB) and FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PMFB achieves a 2.52% return, which is significantly lower than TMAR's 15.63% return.


PMFB

1D
-0.04%
1M
0.18%
YTD
2.52%
6M
2.66%
1Y
7.90%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

TMAR

1D
0.15%
1M
2.88%
YTD
15.63%
6M
16.19%
1Y
29.13%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PMFB vs. TMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between PMFB and TMAR is 0.67, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.67

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 24, 2025

0.60

The correlation between PMFB and TMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.67 - a consistent structural relationship.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

PMFB vs. TMAR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

PMFB
PMFB Risk / Return Rank: 9595
Overall Rank
PMFB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PMFB Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
PMFB Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
PMFB Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
PMFB Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank

TMAR
TMAR Risk / Return Rank: 9292
Overall Rank
TMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
TMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9595
Omega Ratio Rank
TMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
TMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

PMFB vs. TMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February (PMFB) and FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


PMFBTMARDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.94

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.86

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.84

1.70

+0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.92

6.24

-0.32

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

30.29

31.24

-0.94

PMFB vs. TMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PMFB Sharpe Ratio is 3.72, which is higher than the TMAR Sharpe Ratio of 2.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PMFB and TMAR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

PMFB vs. TMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PMFB drawdown since its inception was -2.94%, smaller than the maximum TMAR drawdown of -9.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PMFB and TMAR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PMFBTMARDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-2.94%

-9.93%

+6.99%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.34%

-4.69%

+3.35%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.15%

0.00%

-0.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.37%

-0.71%

+0.34%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.26%

0.93%

-0.67%

Volatility

PMFB vs. TMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February (PMFB) is 0.60%, while FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR) has a volatility of 5.53%. This indicates that PMFB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PMFBTMARDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.60%

5.53%

-4.93%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.52%

9.55%

-8.03%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.14%

10.55%

-8.41%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

2.76%

12.08%

-9.32%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

2.76%

12.08%

-9.32%

PMFB vs. TMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

PMFB has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than TMAR's 0.95% expense ratio.


Dividends

PMFB vs. TMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither PMFB nor TMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


PMFB and TMAR have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

TMAR has higher volatility (5.53%) compared to PMFB (0.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PMFB dropped -2.94% vs TMAR's -9.93%.

On 1-year performance, TMAR leads with 29.13% vs 7.90% for PMFB. On fees, PMFB is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PMFB has been the lower-risk option at 0.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, TMAR has performed better with a 29.13% return vs 7.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

PMFB is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for TMAR.

PMFB and TMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PMFB and 0.95% for TMAR.

PMFB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.72 vs 2.78), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for PMFB and TMAR

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer